In a column for the American Spectator site, Clinton Taylor fact checks a few of the details in George Galloway’s testimony before the Senate Permanent Subcommitte on Investigations: “Curious, George!” As an attorney who has struggled with more than a few witnesses, I was struck at the time of Galloway’s Senate appearance by Galloway’s apparent advantage over his interrogators in his liberty with facts. Taylor’s column supports my impression.
JOHN adds: Galloway’s advantage came from the fact that there was no judge presiding to tell the witness to answer the question. Nor was there a format in which the Senators could follow up on Galloway’s testimony–or was it a filibuster, previewing the Senate Democrats’ performance?–by placing the incriminating documents before the audience and pointing out where Galloway’s explanations fell short.
-
-
Most Read on Power Line
Donate to PL
-
Our Favorites
- American Greatness
- American Mind
- American Story
- American Thinker
- Aspen beat
- Babylon Bee
- Belmont Club
- Churchill Project
- Claremont Institute
- Daily Torch
- Federalist
- Gatestone Institute
- Hollywood in Toto
- Hoover Institution
- Hot Air
- Hugh Hewitt
- InstaPundit
- Jewish World Review
- Law & Liberty
- Legal Insurrection
- Liberty Daily
- Lileks
- Lucianne
- Michael Ramirez Cartoons
- Michelle Malkin
- Pipeline
- RealClearPolitics
- Ricochet
- Steyn Online
- Tim Blair
Media
Subscribe to Power Line by Email
Temporarily disabled
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.